Pairing in-vehicle intelligent agents with different levels of automation: implications from driver attitudes, cognition, and behaviors in automated vehicles

References

• Angelini, L., Baumgartner, J., Carrino, F., Carrino, S., Caon, M., Khaled, O. A., Sauer, J., Lalanne, D., Mugellini, E., & Sonderegger, A. (2016). Comparing gesture, speech and touch interaction modalities for in-vehicle infotainment systems. IHM 2016 - Actes de La 28ieme Conference Francophone Sur l’Interaction Homme-Machine (pp. 188–196). https://doi.org/10.1145/3004107.3004118
   Google Scholar
• Barredo Arrieta, A., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., Barbado, A., Garcia, S., Gil-Lopez, S., Molina, D., Benjamins, R., Chatila, R., & Herrera, F. (2020). Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion, 58, 82–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergmann, K., Eyssel, F., & Kopp, S. (2012). A second chance to make a first impression? How appearance and nonverbal behavior affect perceived warmth and competence of virtual agents over time. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 7502, 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33197-8_13/COVER
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskara, A., Skinner, M., & Loft, S. (2020). Agent transparency: A review of current theory and evidence. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 50(3), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2020.2965529
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao, S., Qin, Y., Zhao, L., & Shen, M. (2015). Modeling the development of vehicle lateral control skills in a cognitive architecture. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpinella, C. M., Wyman, A. B., Perez, M. A., & Stroessner, S. J. (2017). The robotic social attributes scale (RoSAS): Development and validation. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, F1271(March 2017), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020208
   Google Scholar
• Choe, M., & Jeon, M. (2023). I See You: Comparing the effects of affective empathy and cognitive empathy on drivers’ affective states and driving behavior in frustrating driving contexts. Adjunct Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 121–126). https://doi.org/10.1145/3581961.3609879
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774441
   Google Scholar
• Cramer, H., Evers, V., Kemper, N., & Wielinga, B. (2008). Effects of autonomy, traffic conditions and driver personality traits on attitudes and trust towards In-vehicle agents. Proceedings - 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Workshops, WI-IAT Workshops 2008 (Vol. 3, pp. 477–482). https://doi.org/10.1109/WIIAT.2008.326
   Google Scholar
• Dittrich, M., & Mathew, N. (2021). Emotional feedback to mitigate aggressive driving: A real-world driving study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 12684, 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79460-6_8
   Google Scholar
• Du, N., Zhou, F., Tilbury, D., Robert, L. P., & Yang, X. J. (2021). Designing alert systems in takeover transitions: The effects of display information and modality. Proceedings - 13th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI 2021 (pp. 173–180). https://doi.org/10.1145/3409118.3475155
   Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R. (1988). Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (pp. 789–795). https://doi.org/10.1109/NAECON.1988.195097
   Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R. (1995). Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 37(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049499
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R. (2021). Situation awareness measurement: how to measure situation awareness in individuals and teams. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R, & Garland, D. J. (Eds.). (2000). Situation awareness analysis and measurement. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b12461
   Google Scholar
• Epley, N., & Waytz, A. (2010). Mind Perception. In Handbook of Social Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001014.
   Google Scholar
• Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TICS.2006.11.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaffar, A., & Monjezi Kouchak, S. (2016). Using simplified grammar for voice commands to decrease driver distraction. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Embedded System (pp. 23–28).
   Google Scholar
• Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315(5812), 619–619. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hock, P., Kraus, J., Walch, M., Lang, N., & Baumann, M. (2016). Elaborating feedback strategies for maintaining automation in highly automated driving. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 105–112). https://doi.org/10.1145/3003715.3005414
   Google Scholar
• Hone, K. S., & Graham, R. (2000). Towards a tool for the subjective assessment of speech system interfaces (SASSI). Natural Language Engineering, 6(3–4), 287–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1351324900002497
   Google Scholar
• Howard, R. A. (1966). Information value theory. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics, 2(1), 22–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSSC.1966.300074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeon, M., Walker, B. N., & Gable, T. M. (2015). The effects of social interactions with in-vehicle agents on a driver’s anger level, driving performance, situation awareness, and perceived workload. Applied Ergonomics, 50, 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.03.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jian, J.-Y., Bisantz, A. M., & Drury, C. G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327566IJCE0401_04
   Google Scholar
• Ji, W., Liu, R., & Lee, S. H. (2019). Do drivers prefer female voice for guidance? an interaction design about information type and speaker gender for autonomous driving car. In Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics) LNCS (Vol. 11596). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22666-4_15.
   Google Scholar
• Johnsson, I.-M., Nass, C., Harris, H., & Takayama, L. (2005). Matching In-car voice with driver State: Impact on attitude and driving performance. Driving Assessment 2005 : Proceedings of the 3rd International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design (pp. 173–180). https://doi.org/10.17077/drivingassessment.1158
   Google Scholar
• Joo, Y. K., & Lee, J. E. R. (2014). Can “the voices in the car” persuade drivers to go green?: Effects of benefit appeals from in-vehicle voice agents and the role of drivers’ affective states on eco-driving. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(4), 255–261. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo, J., Kwac, J., Ju, W., Steinert, M., Leifer, L., & Nass, C. (2015). Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and performance. International Journal on Interactive Design & Manufacturing (IjideM), 9(4), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-014-0227-2
   Google Scholar
• Kraus, J. M., Nothdurft, F., Hock, P., Scholz, D., Minker, W., & Baumann, M. (2016). Human after all: Effects of mere presence and social interaction of a humanoid robot as a co-driver in automated driving. AutomotiveUI 2016 - 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Adjunct Proceedings (pp. 129–134). https://doi.org/10.1145/3004323.3004338
   Google Scholar
• Kurke, M. I. (2016). Operational sequence diagrams in system design. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 3(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872086100300107
   Google Scholar
• Kwak, S. S. (2014). The impact of the robot appearance types on social interaction with a robot and service evaluation of a robot: Archives of design research. Archives of Design Research, 27(2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2014.05.110.2.81
   Google Scholar
• Large, D. R., & Burnett, G. E. (2013). Drivers’ preferences and emotional responses to satellite navigation voices. International Journal of Vehicle Noise and Vibration, 9(1–2), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVNV.2013.053815
   Google Scholar
• Large, D. R., Harrington, K., Burnett, G., Luton, J., Thomas, P., & Bennett, P. (2019). To please in a pod: Employing an anthropomorphic agent-interlocutor to enhance trust and user experience in an autonomous, self-driving vehicle. Proceedings - 11th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI (Vol. 2019, pp. 49–59). https://doi.org/10.1145/3342197.3344545
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, P. (2016). Speech feedback reduces driver distraction caused by in-vehicle visual interfaces. Proceedings of the Audio Mostly 2016 (Vol. 04-06ed. pp. 7–11). https://doi.org/10.1145/2986416.2986435
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. C., & Jeon, M. (2022). A systematic review of functions and design features of in-vehicle agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 102864. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHCS.2022.102864
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. C., Ko, S., Sanghavi, H., & Jeon, M. (2019). Autonomous driving with an agent: Speech style and embodiment. Adjunct Proceedings - 11th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI 2019 (pp. 209–214). https://doi.org/10.1145/3349263.3351515
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., & Lee, K. M. (2022). Polite speech strategies and their impact on drivers’ trust in autonomous vehicles. Computers in Human Behavior, 127(August 2021), 107015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107015
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, D., Rau, P. P., & Li, Y. (2010). A cross-cultural Study: Effect of robot appearance and task. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12369-010-0056-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maciej, J., & Vollrath, M. (2009). Comparison of manual vs. Speech-based interaction with in-vehicle information systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 41(5), 924–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.05.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, A. D., Alambeigi, H., Engström, J., Markkula, G., Vogelpohl, T., Dunne, J., & Yuma, N. (2019). Toward computational simulations of behavior during automated driving takeovers: A review of the empirical and modeling literatures. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 61(4), 642–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819829572
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nass, C., Jonsson, I. M., Harris, H., Reaves, B., Endo, J., Brave, S., & Takayama, L. (2005). Improving automotive safety by pairing driver emotion and car voice emotion. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings (pp. 1973–1976). https://doi.org/10.1145/1056808.1057070
   Google Scholar
• Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. R. (1994). Computers are social actors. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Celebrating Interdependence - CHI (Vol. 94, pp. 72–78). https://doi.org/10.1145/191666.191703
   Google Scholar
• Niedenthal, P. M., & Setterlund, M. B. (2016). Emotion Congruence in Perception. 20(4), 401–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294204007
   Google Scholar
• Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 52(3), 381–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810376055
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 39(2), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, P. J., Hahn, C. A., Fontana, P. C., Yates, A. N., Greene, K., Broniatowski, D. A., & Przybocki, M. A. (2021). Four principles of explainable artificial intelligence(NIST IR 8312; p. NIST IR 8312). National Institute of Standards and Technology (U.S.). https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8312
   Google Scholar
• SAE-J3016. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Technical report, SAE International. Retrieved April 10, 2024, from https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/
   Google Scholar
• Schaefer, K. E., Sanders, T. L., Yordon, R. E., Billings, D. R., & Hancock, P. A. (2012). Classification of robot form: Factors predicting perceived trustworthiness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 1548–1552. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561308
   Google Scholar
• Schirmer, A., & Adolphs, R. (2017). Emotion perception from face, voice, and touch: Comparisons and convergence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(3), 216–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.01.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuß, M., Manger, C., Löcken, A., Riener, A., & Riener, A. (2022). You’ll never ride alone: insights into women’s security needs in shared automated vehicles. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 13–23). https://doi.org/10.1145/3543174.3546848
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, T., Fujikake, K., Yonekawa, T., Inagami, M., Kinoshita, F., Aoki, H., & Kanamori, H. (2018). Effect of difference in form of driving support agent to driver’s acceptability—Driver agent for encouraging safe driving behavior. Journal of Transportation Technologies, 08(3), 194–208. https://doi.org/10.4236/jtts.2018.83011
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, T., Fujikake, K., Yonekawa, T., Yamagishi, M., Inagami, M., Kinoshita, F., Aoki, H., & Kanamori, H. (2017). Driver agent for encouraging safe driving behavior for the elderly. HAI 2017 - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction (pp. 71–79). https://doi.org/10.1145/3125739.3125743
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, S., Wang, M., & Jeon, M. (2023). Reliable and transparent in-vehicle agents lead to higher behavioral trust in conditionally automated driving systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1121622. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1121622
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Merwe, K., Mallam, S., & Nazir, S. (2022). Agent transparency, situation awareness, mental workload, and operator performance: A systematic literature review. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 66(1), 180–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208221077804
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, M., Hock, P., Chan Lee, S., Baumann, M., & Jeon, M. (2022). Jarvis in the car: Report on characterizing and designing in-vehicle intelligent agents workshop. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 66(1), 948–952. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181322661445
   Google Scholar
• Wang, M., Lee, S. C., Montavon, G., Qin, J., & Jeon, M. (2022). Conversational voice agents are preferred and lead to better driving performance in conditionally automated vehicles. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 1(1), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543174.3546830
   Google Scholar
• Wang, M., Lee, S. C., Sanghavi, H. K., Eskew, M., Zhou, B., & Jeon, M. (2021). In-vehicle intelligent agents in fully autonomous driving: The effects of speech style and embodiment together and separately. 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 247–254). https://doi.org/10.1145/3409118.3475142
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., Zhang, W., & Zhou, R. (2022). Speech-based takeover requests in conditionally automated driving: Effects of different voices on the driver takeover performance. Applied Ergonomics, 101(August 2021), 103695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103695
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J., & Epley, N. (2010). Who sees human? The stability and importance of individual differences in anthropomorphism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waytz, A., Heafner, J., & Epley, N. (2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JESP.2014.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Helton, W. S., Hollands, J. G., & Banbury, S. (2022). Engineering psychology and human performance (5th ed.). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, K., & Breazeal, C. (2013). Reducing driver task load and promoting sociability through an Affective Intelligent Driving Agent (AIDA). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8120(4), 619–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40498-6_53
   Google Scholar
• Williams, K., Peters, J., & Breazeal, C. (2013). Towards leveraging the driver’s mobile device for an intelligent, sociable in-car robotic assistant. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Proceedings (Vol. 4ed. pp. 369–376). https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2013.6629497
   Google Scholar
• Wong, P. N. Y., Brumby, D. P., Babu, H. V. R., & Kobayashi, K. (2019). Watch out! Semi-autonomous vehicles using assertive voices to grab distracted drivers’ attention. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings (pp. 5–10). https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3312838
   Google Scholar
• Wright, J. L., Chen, J. Y., Barnes, M. J., & Hancock, P. A. (2017). Agent reasoning transparency: The influence of information level on automation- induced complacency, U.S. Army Res. Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, USA (Report No. ARL-TR-8044).
   Google Scholar